Reclaiming SJW

[Sean Hollyman]

So how far does 'Social Justice Warrior' extend beyond Keyboard Warrior?

 

[Depulcator]

So are we starting the hash tag #notallsjw? Because that looks like the direction you're heading.

 

[Drake Barrow]

Thank you, OP. By searching for the term 'head mate', I found a whole glossary of terminology that will be incredibly useful for potential sci-fantasy projects in the future. Thus far, that and the inevitable descent of the thread into madness and fire have been the most useful things here.

OT: don't worry about 'reclaiming' SJW, it never needed to be claimed in the first place. It will eventually go away, and it won't be missed, whereas people who do things to make the world a better place will be remembered regardless of labels. Deeds, not words.

 

[Atmos Duality]

K.
Then I suggest less preach, and more practice.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

Have the people who like to use the phrase "check your privilege" ever considered that checking one's privilege could in itself be a privilege? Therefore telling someone to check their privilege would in fact be insensitive to people who do not have that privilege, and therefore force the speaker to check their own privilege instead. As such anyone someone tells you to check their privilege you should tell them to check their own privilege until they either get bored and leave you alone or blow up in your face.

 

[Lilani]

Anyway, I identify as an Uber-Nerd Social Justice Warrior. And I've been hearing a LOT of rage lately against social justice warriors. A LOT. Most of it seems to centered around Tumblr and how ridiculous people are on there.

You identify as a what? Well fine then, I identify as an Ultra-Capricious Kerning Crusader. There, now we both have titles of equal value and meaning. Because my title has no meaning, I think you see my point.

Standing up for people who are mistreated in public doesn't make you a "warrior." It makes you a decent person. I can tell you exactly why "SJWs" get so much hate: the fact that the whole idea of it is just so self-indulgent and self-congratulatory. When I do something nice for somebody, I pride myself on NOT drawing unnecessary attention to it, and not giving myself some self-serving, self-given title to show people how nice I think I am. The nicest people don't ask for recognition for their niceness. It's better looked upon than nonsense like "SJWs" because it operates under the assumption that being nice to people isn't something that should be a big deal. It should just be standard operating procedure.

THAT is why there is so much contagious hate for "SJWs." There's just something extremely insufferable about people who go about being nice in the most boastful and self-congratulatory ways possible.

 

[Thaluikhain]

I'm sorry but how does one keep their privilege in check might I ask??

Mostly by recognising that other people aren't you, that you aren't an expert on their lives, and that things that are perfectly fine for you might not be for others.

This is a lot harder, and more painful, than it sounds.

Does this sword cut both ways? When people make molehills out of mountains we tell them to check their privilege. When someone makes mountains out of molehills, do we tell them to check their...victim complex, I guess? Is there a better term for it?

Would that not first require that you decide you know better than them about the problems in their own lives?

Now, certainly, there are a lot of times when I want to tell someone this, that they are wrong about their own lived experiences. But deciding that that is for me to decide probably really isn't a good idea.

 

[LetalisK]

I'm sorry but how does one keep their privilege in check might I ask??

Mostly by recognising that other people aren't you, that you aren't an expert on their lives, and that things that are perfectly fine for you might not be for others.

This is a lot harder, and more painful, than it sounds.

Does this sword cut both ways? When people make molehills out of mountains we tell them to check their privilege. When someone makes mountains out of molehills, do we tell them to check their...victim complex, I guess? Is there a better term for it?

Would that not first require that you decide you know better than them about the problems in their own lives?

Now, certainly, there are a lot of times when I want to tell someone this, that they are wrong about their own lived experiences. But deciding that that is for me to decide probably really isn't a good idea.

Couldn't I say the same thing about you telling people to check their privilege? How much do you actually know about that person, especially on the internet? Maybe a couple bits of demographic data? Or maybe not even that and it's based purely on the opinion they hold? Besides, isn't people having a skewed perspective because of their life experience the problem? Or rather, that they don't recognize that their perspective is skewed.

 

[rob_simple]

I always thought terms like SJW and White Knight were only used ironically to describe people who only want to look like they're making a difference, or in other ways have a less than noble agenda (i.e. someone who doesn't stand up for a woman because it's the human thing to do, but because they genuinely believe it will get them a golden ticket into her pants).

The kind of people I'd identify as SJW's are the people who think putting up a photo of themselves with no make-up on Facebook -while donating zero money to anything- is on par with those who climb literal mountains to raise hundreds of pounds for a worthy cause, or the people who post stupid slogans on Tumblr and beg for notes (REBLOG IF YOU AGREE, GUYS!), thinking that's on level with women in the middle-east who risk being actually proper killed for speaking up about their belief that maybe it's okay if girls get an education.

Anyone who actually cares about furthering equality or raising the profile of any other noble causes would never refer to themselves as something so god damn dumb as Social Justice Warrior, because they're too busy trying to actually make a difference in the real world; not circle-jerking on Tumblr and coming up with dumbass names for their little treehouse gang.

So no, I don't think we should try to reclaim such goofy terms, we should instead re-define them to describe the kind of Facebook armchair crusaders who want to inflate their own ego under the guise of a good cause.

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

"Check your privilege" is so pretentious I have to stop there and comment before I go to anything else. Yeah we're all different, with different social pressures and the like. The ones who've "had it better" in life still didn't pick their parents, skin color or gender. One cannot hold another's upbringing and environmental/societal pressures against them and at the same time claim to say they're "fighting" for other folk's inequality. We're all unequal, it sucks, its not just society but genetics that also come in to play there and not all of us are able to willingly look down on ourselves just because we might have had it easier because of an accident of birth. That's a bit over the line.
Now calling yourself a warrior for something that isn't a war, isn't clearly defined on who or what exactly is the enemy leads to just breeding contempt for those who don't "see it your way". Wars are bad things, the last resort when all other avenues have failed, and by then the real fighting already started. You don't want to be a warrior, no one should. Not if you've actually had to face what that means, or been around someone who's been through it already. This is not even a cold war, its a societal change that can only come about through education. Education that comes from the home, not mandates handed down from above or by committees who sit and think up ways to "diversify" the planet. We're all a group of beings with flaws, tend to screw up and treat others badly because they don't fit in our belief system.
I don't claim to be any smarter than anyone else on the planet, I don't have answers to give on how things can be changed for the better. The part that screws me up most is how volatile some people are when it comes to opposing viewpoints while at the same time these folk clamor for "peace and understanding." Its not at all peaceful to claim to be a warrior.
No, I don't think SJW is a term that means anything other than "look at me, I'm a good person" like owning a Prius or other hybrid seems to do for some folks.
Ye Gods am I sick about hearing this stuff sometimes. Politics in general has done nothing but made me cynical as hell towards politics and people who get involved. There's no more room for healthy debate any longer, its becoming a war yes and it is wrong. It won't turn out well at all in the end. In a war, everyone loses even the victors.
Fighting anything is and always should be the last line of defense, when life and death are on the line and you're either protecting yourself, family or people you care about who are in immediate danger. Otherwise any form of fighting is just aggression translated into physical or verbal violence, both of which can leave scars and both of which are tough to recover from fully. I detest fighting, I detest war of any sort. It solves nothing, does nothing and only makes us weaker as a species when we devolve back to that base instinct. Fuck me... I rant a lot, but I'm just so sick of reading these posts that seem to scream "look at how activist I am."

tl;dr - Look its pretty simple and my point might be muddied by a migraine but if you really want to help people don't worry about what you're called or who the hell knows about it. Do what you can, where you can. Act locally, think locally and try to alter your own environment that way. If everyone took a few minutes to do something they normally wouldn't do every day, the world would start to be a better place. Stop reading bumper stickers and slogans, stop jumping on bandwagons and chilling in internet sounding boards. Be your own person, don't label yourself and if you want to make a difference, lead by example. Thats the best we can all do IMO, be the best people we can be and hope others see it and try to emulate it.

 

[Eddie the head]

As a warrior do you actually fight or are you just another anon clicking Post on the internet?

My man over here, asking the tough questions.

I feel like these two comments have said more about this issue then any of the paragraphs in favor or against the OP.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Couldn't I say the same thing about you telling people to check their privilege? How much do you actually know about that person, especially on the internet? Maybe a couple bits of demographic data? Or maybe not even that and it's based purely on the opinion they hold? Besides, isn't people having a skewed perspective because of their life experience the problem? Or rather, that they don't recognize that their perspective is skewed.

If it was based solely on their opinion, then yes, I'm making an assumption.

If I know what demographics they are in, then I know certain demographics that they aren't in, though.

 

[Queen Michael]

Most of the tumblr SJWs are young girls in their mid teens. And teenagers plus internet almost always equals stupidity. They should grow out of it.

And teenagers plus ideology almost always equals unbearably fanatic.

 

[Queen Michael]

There are too many people who the description accurately fits for it to be re-claimed. I know it's a cliche by this point but there is a contingent of morally superior jerks out there who like nothing better than to find the next thing to 'protest' and the next nit to pick. I think the entire SJW thing came about because people on the internet like thinking they are not only right but that their beliefs make them better than you.

The whole "Warrior" thing encapsulates their misguided sense of self importance. So no, the term can't be really be re-claimed because it still applies and has certain connotations.

^ Someone who understands things.

Trying to shift the negative stigma off of SJW is like trying to shift the negative stigma associated with being called a Nazi. It's simply too accurate to change. SJW by my measure, atleast, is generally a jerk who acts like a damn child everytime they don't get every single thing they want, and then create (faulty) justification as to why they deserve everything. Doesn't help that they're also pyschotic issue-pushing, morally superior, jerks.

You forgot one thing: They also scour every text post they agree with for accidental unfortunate implications, so they can accuse the post's author of being the wors person ever.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

The number of reported male rape in prison is actually larger than the number of reported rape period for general society.

So please stop gendering rape.

If your quoted statistic is true, all you are doing is demonstrating that an overwhelming majority of rapists are men. If that isn't "gendering rape" I'm not sure what is.

 

[Mau95]

If you really think you're doing good, and the people you're trying to help agree, then I don't see why not. However, getting rid of the stigma won't be easy.
Best subreddit btw http://www.reddit.com/r/TumblrInAction/

"Rocket Science"

 

[wetnap]

Most of the tumblr SJWs are young girls in their mid teens. And teenagers plus internet almost always equals stupidity. They should grow out of it.

Unfortunately it infested academia, so instead of growing out of it, people are growing into it.

Beyond immaturity it just promotes a toxic type of thinking. Like how if creationism was taught in schools would close the mind to science, it just closes the mind to reason and critical thought. Its just notable how these people just have as about as much concern for critical thought, reason and fact as fox news.

The part that screws me up most is how volatile some people are when it comes to opposing viewpoints while at the same time these folk clamor for "peace and understanding." Its not at all peaceful to claim to be a warrior.

Yep these "victims" are the first to attack. Whether its flagging campaigns to remove speech they disagree with, or just getting people fired, or just enacting censorship, these people are just hypocrites.

 

[Saetha]

The number of reported male rape in prison is actually larger than the number of reported rape period for general society.

So please stop gendering rape.

If your quoted statistic is true, all you are doing is demonstrating that an overwhelming majority of rapists are men. If that isn't "gendering rape" I'm not sure what is.

Actually, a lot of male inmates report a female attacker - 69 to 64% reported of victims of sexual assualt from prison staff reported a female attacker. (Source: http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/svpjri0809.pdf Page 4, second-to-last bullet point) (Granted, the number of inmate-on-inmate assault was also higher for men, but note that the number of staff-on-inmate assault for men is even higher than that)

Similarly, a lot of kids in juvy report being sexually victimized by women - 94% of victims abused by staff members reported a female attacker, actually. (Source: http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/svjfry09.pdf Fifth bullet point on the first page)

Several reports on sexual abuse in schools show that those investigated or disciplined for sexual misconduct are mostly men (80-90%) - yet the studies that asked students found that over forty percent of reported abusers were female (Source: http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/research/pubs/misconductreview/report.pdf Page 33) The bottom of page 32 explains that the five studies that don't interview the students directly (These are the last five studies in the table on page 33) are the ones that overwhelmingly show men as offenders - while the two studies that interviewed the actual students show much more gender parity. Four of those five studies merely analyzed records of who had been disciplined for sexual misconduct, while the methodology of the fifth isn't even listed.

So, what we can conclude from that, is that even though female educators sexually abuse at nearly the same rates as men, they're investigated and disciplined a lot less often. Either way, it shows that, no, this really isn't a gendered issue for either victims or offenders. Maybe women are victimized slightly more, and offend slightly less, but the disparity is in no way big enough to justify writing male victims off as anomalies, and saying rape is something that usually happens to women, by men.

Either way, I'd think it wouldn't matter what the gender of the attacker was - the victim is who's important. They're the ones that have to suffer through it. They're the ones who have to live with it for the rest of their lives. And they're the ones you're erasing and writing off as a "gendered problem" because they might have the same gender as their attacker.

 

[Saetha]

And they're the ones you're erasing and writing off as a "gendered problem" because they might have the same gender as their attacker.

Uh...I pointed out that a statement you made suggested a gendered problem. I didn't make an argument about it one way or the other, let alone "write something off".

Don't let that blunt your righteous indignation, though.

I said that the number of men raped in prison is pretty high, and you said that means the overwhelming majority of rapists are men, so it's still a gendered problem. You took my statement about the rate of victimization, and assumed it was also indicative of victimizers, and then stated that your assumption means it's still a gendered problem. I never said anything about the number of men who raped, only those who are raped. When you made a faulty assumption based on that statement, I pointed out the flaw in that thinking.

Your exact words were that I "demonstrated that an overwhelming majority of rapists are men." I did no such thing. That's an assumption you made, and thus one I sought to correct.

 

[LetalisK]

Couldn't I say the same thing about you telling people to check their privilege? How much do you actually know about that person, especially on the internet? Maybe a couple bits of demographic data? Or maybe not even that and it's based purely on the opinion they hold? Besides, isn't people having a skewed perspective because of their life experience the problem? Or rather, that they don't recognize that their perspective is skewed.

If it was based solely on their opinion, then yes, I'm making an assumption.

If I know what demographics they are in, then I know certain demographics that they aren't in, though.

And you're still making assumptions based on those demographics. Racist and sexist ones at that and I don't mean the "omg white men are so oppressed". By knowing "certain demographics that they aren't in" your making a ton of assumptions, out right stereotypes in many cases, about what that "certain demographics" life experience is and while that can be applicable on a general statistical level(I'm not trying to deny that there is an issue with white privilege here after all), on the personal level it's the very heart of racism and sexism. Just because someone is a certain race or sex doesn't mean they hold a special privileged or ignorant view inherently. Their life experience determines that.

Next time there is a wealth inequality discussion and you tell someone to check their privilege -because- they're white, go find a black person you don't really know and introduce him as a ghetto subject matter expert. Because that's the implication you're making when you base it on demographics rather than their actual experience.